Seafood, retailer and consumer safety concerns, Food Consumption/Nutrition/Food Safety,

Caron, Nieves

Halbrendt, Catherine K.

Wang, Qingbin

English

Research Papers in Economics

PART FOUR:  Economics of Processor-
and Retailer-Level Supply of Food Safety
10. Differences Between Retailer and
Consumer Concerns About Seafood
Safety:  Evidence From Survey Data
Qingbin Wang, Catherine Halbrendt,
and Nieves Caron
The Economics of
Reducing Health Risk from Food
EDITED BY
Julie A. Caswell
Proceedings of NE-165 Conference
June 6-7, 1995
Washington, D.C.
Food Marketing Policy Center
Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics
University of ConnecticutDifferences Between Retailer and Consumer
Concerns About Seafood Safety:  Evidence From
Survey Data
Qingbin Wang (qwang@moose.uvm.edu)
Catherine Halbrendt (chalbren@moose.uvm.edu)
Nieves Caron
Department of Community Development and Applied Economics
University of Vermont, Burlington, VT 05405
Keywords: Seafood, retailer and consumer safety concerns
Copyright © 1996 by Food Marketing Policy Center, University of Connecticut. All rights
reserved. Readers may make verbatim copies of this document for non-commercial purposes by
any means, provided that this copyright notice appears on all such copies.141
10
Differences Between Retailer and Consumer
Concerns About Seafood Safety:
Evidence From Survey Data
Qingbin Wang, Catherine Halbrendt, and Nieves Caron1
Per capita seafood consumption in the United States increased steadily from 10.3 pounds in 1960
to 16.1 pounds in 1987 but has been lower than 16 pounds since 1988 (National Marine Fisheries
Service 1993).  Such a fluctuation in per capita seafood consumption in the past several years seems
inconsistent with the general expectation that seafood consumption would increase steadily because of
its health benefits (Gall and O'Dierno 1995, Jacobson et al. 1991).  Identification and assessment of
causes for the fluctuation in seafood consumption are of great importance for the U.S. seafood industry
which is currently faced with a host of challenging problems such as strong competition from less
expensive imports.  In 1993 more than one half of all seafood consumed in the United States was
imported and such imports contributed $2.7 billion to the U.S. trade deficit (National Marine Fisheries
Service 1993).
Previous studies have suggested that increasing consumer awareness about the safety of seafood
might have limited both the consumption frequency and level of seafood for many consumers (e.g.,
Jacobson et al. 1991, Lin et al. 1991, Lin and Milon 1995).  Seafood safety has emerged as a major
public concern and a challenge for the seafood industry and policymakers in the United States.  Although
per capita consumption of seafood is much less than that of red meats and poultry, seafood has been
identified as a major source of many health hazards caused by unsafe meats.  For example, 56 percent
of the food-poisoning outbreaks linked to meat from 1983 to 1987 were due to seafood although seafood
comprised only 8 percent of the total meat consumed during the period (Jacobson et al. 1991).  A recent
consumer survey conducted by the Department of Food and Resource Economics at the University of
Delaware shows that about 50 percent of consumers in the Northeastern region are very doubtful or
somewhat doubtful about the safety of seafood sold in the market (Gempesaw et al. 1995).  Major
seafood safety issues include unsafe microorganisms, filth and improper cleaning, and chemicals in
processing operations (Payson 1994).
As buyers from producers and sellers to consumers, seafood retailers are important players in the
seafood industry.  But their concerns about food safety issues and preferences toward major attributes
of seafood products have not been well investigated since most seafood safety studies have focused
mainly on consumers (e.g., Lin et al. 1991, Lin and Milon 1995, Gempesaw et al. 1995).  One possible
explanation for the exclusion of retailers in seafood safety studies is that information on consumer
preferences is assumed to be transmitted efficiently and quickly to producers through retailers.  Such an
assumption needs to be tested because consumers and retailers are generally faced with different decision
problems as well as economic restrictions.  This study contributes to the food safety literature by
examining the differences between consumer and retailer concerns about seafood safety using cross-142
sectional data from consumer and retailer surveys conducted in the Northeast and Mid-Atlantic regions.
Furthermore, retailer valuation of a government program for seafood inspection and grading and
willingness to pay for the service are also investigated using retailer survey data.  The following sections
describe the consumer and retailer survey, analyze the differences between consumer and retailer
concerns about seafood safety issues, and summarize major findings and their implications.
Data Sources
Data used in our analysis are directly from consumer and retailer surveys conducted by the
Department of Food and Resource Economics at the University of Delaware from 1993 to 1994.  The
consumer survey was conducted to gather market information regarding Northeastern consumer decisions
to purchase finfish products (fresh hybrid striped bass, trout, and salmon) and shellfish products (clams,
mussels, and oysters) and to assess consumer perceptions about the safety of shellfish and finfish
products.  The survey was mailed to 5000 households in the Northeastern region and 1504 responded
with complete surveys, representing roughly a 30 percent response rate.  Of the 1504 respondents, 37
percent were female and 97 percent indicated that there was at least one seafood consumer in their
households.
The retailer survey was designed to examine finfish retailers' concerns about selected seafood safety
issues and preferences toward major attributes of finfish products (tilapia, Atlantic salmon, rainbow
trout, and catfish) in the Mid-Atlantic region.  According to the listing of seafood retailers in the Mid-
Atlantic region provided by a marketing company, a letter with the intent of sorting out only finfish
retailers was sent to all the seafood retailers explaining our research objectives and requesting their
participation in the survey.  Responses were received from 86 finfish retailers and 56 of them actually
participated in the survey.  A major reason for the low response rate was that about half of the retailers
on the original list did not purchase finfish and some others had gone out of business.  A face-to-face
interview technique was used to collect data from September 1993 to September 1994.  Of the 56 finfish
retailers, 72.5 percent were corporations, 17.6 percent were sole proprietorships, and 9.9 percent had
other business structures such as a partnership; 28 percent were from Maryland, 20 percent from
Delaware, 16 percent from Pennsylvania, and 36 percent from other Mid-Atlantic states; 79 percent
expanded their fish purchases over the past 5 years; and most indicated freshness as the key factor for
their purchases.
Differences Between Retailer and Consumer Concerns
About Seafood Safety
As a major objective of the consumer and retailer surveys, we analyzed consumer and retailer
preferences for major fish attributes, including safety attributes of selected fish species, using alternative
econometric models such as conjoint preference and logit models (Gempesaw et al. 1995, Halbrendt et
al. 1995).  This chapter examines the differences between consumer and retailer concerns about some
seafood safety issues.  Consumer and retailer responses to selected questions and statements designed
to measure their concerns about seafood safety are compared in several figures.
Figures 10.1 and 10.2 show consumer and retailer responses to a statement about the primary cause
of unsafe fish.  Ninety-six percent of consumers strongly agree or somewhat agree that improper
handling and storage in the marketplace are a primary cause of unsafe fish, whereas 63 percent of finfish
retailers strongly agree or somewhat agree that improper handling and storage after purchase by the
consumer are a primary cause of unsafe fish.  These results suggest that seafood retailers and consumers
are blaming each other for improper handling and storage as a major cause of unsafe fish.  As a possibleStrongly
agree
Somewhat
agree
Neutral Somewhat
disagree
Strongly
disagree
Don't know
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
P
e
r
c
e
n
t
Strongly
agree
Somewhat
agree
Neutral Somewhat
disagree
Strongly
disagree
Don't know
Strongly
agree
Somewhat
agree
Neutral Somewhat
disagree
Strongly
disagree
Don't know
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
P
e
r
c
e
n
t
Strongly
agree
Somewhat
agree
Neutral Somewhat
disagree
Strongly
disagree
Don't know
143
FIGURE 10.1  Retailer Response to the Statement That Improper Handling and Storage After Purchase
by the Consumer Are a Primary Cause of Unsafe Fish
FIGURE 10.2  Consumer Response to the Statement That Improper Handling and Storage in the
Marketplace Are a Primary Cause of Unsafe Fish144
consequence of such a significant difference between consumer and retailer concerns about the cause of
unsafe fish, both consumers and retailers may expect each other to be responsible for improving the
safety of seafood.
Figures 10.3 and 10.4 present the results of consumer and retailer responses to  two questions
regarding the acknowledgement of harvesting date and location.  Figure 10.3 shows that more than 80
percent of consumers and retailers are interested in knowing, at the time of purchase, when the fish were
harvested.  Such a strong interest in the harvesting date for both consumers and retailers may reflect
preferences for fresh fish and perceptions that there is a correlation between freshness and the harvest
date.
Figure 10.4 indicates that more than 55 percent of consumers and about 75 percent of retailers want
to know where the fish was harvested when they purchase fish.  Both consumers and retailers may have
a perception linking fish quality and safety with the location where it was harvested.
Figures 10.5 and 10.6 present the  results of  two  questions regarding consumer and retailer
perceptions about farm-raised versus wild-harvested fish.  Figure 10.5 shows that more than one-half
of the surveyed consumers and retailers strongly agree or somewhat agree that water pollution is more
likely to create a problem for wild-harvested than farm-raised fish.  Figure 10.6 presents the results of
consumer and retailer responses to the statement that farm-raised fish are safer than wild-harvested fish.
About one-half of the consumers and 60 percent of retailers strongly agree or somewhat agree with the
statement.  Retailer and consumer responses are quite similar except that a relatively larger proportion
of consumers (24 percent) do not know whether farm-raised fish are safer than wild- harvested fish.
Aquaculture has emerged as the fastest growing agricultural industry in the U.S. in recent years (USDA).
The positive perception of both retailers and consumers about the safety of aquaculture (farm-raised)
products may be a key factor that has contributed to the rapid growth of the aquaculture industry.
Figures 10.7 and 10.8 show the results of  retailer responses to some questions regarding a
government program for seafood grading and inspection.  As shown in Figure 10.7, a majority of
retailers believe that such a program would increase consumer confidence in seafood safety and retail
sales.  Figure 10.8 suggests that about 70 percent of retailers would support the program but only 30
percent of them are willing to pay for the service (5 cents or more per pound).  As a result of the growing
consumer awareness about the safety of seafood, a program instituted by the USDA or other government
agency for the grading and inspection of seafood, similar to those for poultry and pork, has been
proposed by U.S. policymakers.  Results from our retailer survey indicate that most retailers would
support the program because it is expected to increase consumer confidence and their sales, but only a
small proportion of retailers are willing to pay for the program.
Summary and Conclusions
This study examines the differences between retailer and consumer concerns about some important
seafood safety issues using data from consumer and retailer surveys conducted in the Northeastern and
Mid-Atlantic regions.  Results suggest several interesting conclusions: 1) both consumers and retailers
have shown great concern about seafood safety, but their responses are significantly different regarding
many issues such as the primary cause of unsafe fish; 2) about 50 percent of consumers are very doubtful
or somewhat doubtful about the safety of finfish sold in the U.S.; 3) about 70 percent of the surveyed
retailers would support a government program for the grading and inspection of seafood but only 30
percent of them are willing to pay for the service; 4) freshness and price are the key factors affecting both
retailer and consumer purchasing decisions about seafood; 5) both retailers and consumers have shown
significant preferences for farm-raised over wild-harvested fish due  to  safety concerns and such
preferences may be a source of continuing growth for the aquaculture industry; 6) seafood labeling suchStrongly
agree
Somewhat
agree
Neutral Somewhat
disagree
Strongly
disagree
Don't know
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
P
e
r
c
e
n
t
Strongly
agree
Somewhat
agree
Neutral Somewhat
disagree
Strongly
disagree
Don't know
Consumers
Retailers
Strongly
agree
Somewhate
agree
Neutral Somewhate
disagree
Strongly
disagree
Don't know
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
P
e
r
c
e
n
t
Strongly
agree
Somewhate
agree
Neutral Somewhate
disagree
Strongly
disagree
Don't know
Consumers
Retailers
145
FIGURE 10.3  Consumer and Retailer Responses to the Statement That It Is Important to Indicate the
Date When the Fish Was Harvested
FIGURE 10.4  Consumer and Retailer Responses to the Statement That It Is Important to Know Where
the Fish Was HarvestedStrongly
agree
Somewhat
agree
Neutral Somewhat
disagree
Strongly
disagree
Don't
know
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
P
e
r
c
e
n
t
Strongly
agree
Somewhat
agree
Neutral Somewhat
disagree
Strongly
disagree
Don't
know
Consumers
Retailers
Strongly
agree
Somewhat
agree
Neutral Somewhat
disagree
Strongly
disagree
Don't know
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
P
e
r
c
e
n
t
Strongly
agree
Somewhat
agree
Neutral Somewhat
disagree
Strongly
disagree
Don't know
Consumers
Retailers
146
FIGURE 10.5  Consumer and Retailer Responses to the Statement That Water Pollution Is More Likely
to Create a Problem for Wild-Harvested Than for Farm-Raised Fish
FIGURE 10.6  Consumer and Retailer Responses to the Statement That Farm-Raised Fish Are Safer
Than Wild-Harvested FishYes No Not sure
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
P
e
r
c
e
n
t
Yes No Not sure
Would increase sales of
seafood
Would increase consumer
confidence 
Yes No Not sure
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
P
e
r
c
e
n
t
Yes No Not sure
Support the program 
Willing to pay for the service
147
FIGURE 10.7  Retailer Valuation of a Government Program for Seafood Grading and Inspection
FIGURE 10.8  Retailer Concerns About a Government Program for Seafood Grading and Inspection and
Willingness to Pay for the Service148
as where and when the fish were harvested may increase consumer and retailer confidence in the safety
of seafood and therefore increase purchases; and 7) educational and promotional programs are needed
for both consumers and retailers to promote seafood consumption.
Note
Qingbin Wang is Research Assistant Professor and Catherine Halbrendt is Professor in the 1
Department of Community Development and Applied Economics at the University of Vermont, and
Nieves Caron is a graduate student in the Department of Food and Resource Economics at the University
of Delaware.  The authors wish to thank Valerie Mamara for her editorial assistance and the Northeast
Regional Aquaculture Center for its funding support of this study.  This research was conducted while
Halbrendt and Wang were employees of the University of Delaware.
References 
Gall, Ken and Linda O'Dierno.  1995.  Aquaculture Marketing Survey:  Consumers, Retail Stores, and
Food Service Operations in New Jersey and New York.  Stony Brook, NJ:  New Jersey Department
of Agriculture.
Gempesaw, C. M., J. R. Bacon, C. Wessells, and A. Manalo.  In Press.  Consumer Perceptions of
Aquaculture Products.  American Journal of Agricultural Economics.
Halbrendt, Catherine, Qingbin Wang, Cristina Fraiz, and Linda O'Dierno.  In Press.  Marketing
Problems and Opportunities in Mid-Atlantic Seafood Retailing.  American Journal of Agricultural
Economics.
Jacobson, Michael F., Lisa Y. Leffert, and Anne W. Garland.  1991.  Safe Food:  Eating Wisely in a
Risky World.  Los Angeles, CA:  Living Planet Press.
Lin, C.-T. Jordan and J. Walter Milon.  1995.  Contingent Valuation of Health Risk Reductions for
Shellfish Products.  In Valuing Food Safety and Nutrition, ed. Julie A. Caswell, 83-114.  Boulder,
CO:  Westview Press.
Lin, C.-T. Jordan, J. Walter Milon, and Emerson Babb.  1991.  Determinants of Subjective Food Safety
Perceptions:  A Case Study of Oysters in the Southeast.  Journal of Agribusiness 9(1):71-84.
National Marine Fisheries Service, United States Department of Commerce.  1993.  Fisheries of the
United States.  Washington, D.C.: National Marine Fisheries Service.
Payson, Steven.  1994.  Using Historical Information to Identify Consumer Concerns About Food
Safety.  Washington, D.C.:  United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), Economic Research Service.  Aquaculture:  Situation
and Outlook Report.  Washington, D.C.: USDA.  (Various issues).

Aquaculture Marketing Survey: Consumers, Retail Stores, and Food Service Operations in New Jersey and

Contingent Valuation of Health Risk Reductions for Shellfish Products.

Determinants of Subjective Food Safety Perceptions: A Case Study of Oysters in the Southeast.

Fisheries of the United States.

Safe Food: Eating Wisely in a Risky World.

Using Historical Information to Identify Consumer Concerns About Food Safety.

DIFFERENCES BETWEEN RETAILER AND CONSUMER CONCERNS ABOUT SEAFOOD SAFETY: EVIDENCE FROM SURVEY DATA

DIFFERENCES BETWEEN RETAILER AND CONSUMER CONCERNS ABOUT SEAFOOD SAFETY: EVIDENCE FROM SURVEY DATA

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Research Papers in Economics